The same day that we hear about at least 27 people killed in a school, including little children, we also get word that the Michigan legislature not only wants guns in schools, but a way for CCW holders to override any voluntary GFZ status that a school can still have.

---
Bill allowing concealed guns in Michigan schools, churches heads to governor

Carrying concealed weapons into schools, churches and stadiums is against the law in Michigan, but it might not be for much longer.

Lawmakers in both the House and Senate approved Senate Bill 59 to allow concealed weapons in several gun-free zones Thursday, as well as doing away with county boards currently overseeing concealed pistol licensing.

The Michigan House and Senate voted Thursday to allow concealed fire arms for licensed carriers in previously restricted areas, including churches and schools. The Michigan House and Senate voted Thursday to allow concealed fire arms for licensed carriers in previously restricted areas, including churches and schools.

"If you have pistol free zones they are actually mass murderer empowerment zones," said Steve Dulan, attorney for the Michigan Coalition of Responsible Gun Owners, who represents sportsman clubs throughout Michigan backing the bill. "If you actually look at the history, even over the past 10 years in the U.S., you find that maybe all but one mass shooting has occurred in a so-called gun free zone."

Michigan law currently prohibits concealed weapons in schools, churches, day cares, hospitals, dorms, casinos and any public entertainment venue able to hold more than 2,500 people. Violators can be charged a civil infraction with a $500 fine and six-month concealed pistol license suspension. Repeat offenses can lead to a four-year felony, $5,000 fine and concealed pistol license being revoked.

Under the new law schools and private establishments would be able to voluntarily remain pistol-free zones, if desired.

Dulan says creating gun-free zones disarms private citizens to any criminals who don't obey the laws in the first place.

"There is a complete logical fallacy that there are no guns in a gun free zone," Dulan said. "It's as ridiculous as the drug-free school zone signs. No one believes those either ... What you are doing in this case is disarming law biding people."

Michigan has 351,599 concealed weapons permits issued statewide, according to a state report dated Dec. 1. Those certified carriers would need an additional nine hours training and 94 additional rounds at the firing range to qualify to concealed carry in gun-free zones, the bill states.

Language in the concealed carry reform bill would eliminate county review boards made up of representatives from the Michigan State Police, county prosecutor's office and county sheriff's department, likely streamlining the process.

The Michigan Sheriff's Association has been one of the largest opponents of the bill. Northern Michigan sheriffs see the bill as a burden.

"It would make the sheriff the sole person on the board, and if I decide in my conscience a person should not have a (concealed carry permit) for what ever reason, then that person has the ability to appeal that in circuit court to the point where I could be fined for not giving a (permit)," said Charlevoix County Sheriff Don Schneider, who opposes the bill. "In no way do I want that dumped on us. It is just not right. You are going to cause every sheriff to say: 'You want a CCW? Fine, because I'm not going to get sued.'"

Emmet County Sheriff Pete Wallin also has issues with doing away with Concealed Weapons Licensing Boards and has contacted local lawmakers to voice his concerns.

"I just say if it's not broke, why try to fix it?" Wallin said. "It is nice to have other input on it. I don't want the sole responsibility, and I think it works just fine."

Wallin believes the boards going away would create a significant amount of new work for his office.

The bill moved early Thursday from the House Natural Resources, Tourism and Outdoor Recreation Committee chaired by state Rep. Frank Foster, R-Petoskey, before coming to the full floor for a vote.

"This changes the (concealed pistol license) permit process to remove layers of unnecessary bureaucracy and red tape, and since it is assigning new responsibilities, I wanted to make sure our discussion included all the stakeholders so they were on board," Foster said in a statement. "As committee chairman, I think we conducted a very transparent and thorough legislative process and took input from all ranges of opinions."

Sen. Mike Green, R-Mayville , primary sponsor for SB 59, commended Foster for his role in getting the legislation passed.

"Rep. Foster's courage and leadership on behalf of Michigan's law-abiding gun owners was key to advancing SB 59, the most fundamental CPL reform in Michigan history," Green said.

Heading into a final marathon lame duck session Thursday night, the House passed the bill 68-41 and the Senate concurred 27-11, mostly along party lines.

Detractors have amassed against expanding concealed weapons into gun-free zones throughout the legislative process.

Pastor Sherri McGuffin at Cross of Christ Lutheran in Petoskey says if SB 59 is made law, she believes it could cause an "uncomfortable" situation for her members.

"I don't have anything against guns, we use them for hunting and for sport, but when they are used for maliciousness, to wield power or an emotion, we have a problem," McGuffin said.

Because people often seek out churches in times of emotional distress and need, she said, those are often times when people should not have a firearm.

"We practice no hitting, no yelling. It's a place of sanctuary," McGuffin said about her church.

McGuffin said in churches and other places where weapons have been used or brandished "that's no longer a sanctuary."

That sentiment has been echoed across the state. More than 600 churches have signed onto a resolution authored at the Detroit Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church calling for the bill to fail.

School officials have also responded in opposition.

"I'm opposed to it because it doesn't settle with me that we would have people in schools with concealed guns," John Scholten, Petoskey Public Schools superintendent.

The Michigan Association of School Administrators opposes the legislation over safety concerns.

"We expel our students for having any type of weapon, and can find no good reason to open school property to others who bring weapons on campus," said Linda Wacyk, spokesperson for the MASA. "We prohibit weapons to keep our students and staff members safe; that prohibition should extend to adults who visit as well."

Don Wotruba, deputy director for the Michigan Association of School Boards, testified against legislation regarding concerns he has about potential accidents relating to more weapons being in schools.

"More guns in the proximity of kids is not about bad use, it's about potential accidents," he says.

"I don't have any issue with a person that is properly trained or that they are going to break the law," Wotruba said. "I worry about somebody breaking up a fight and there is a gun on somebody's waist being taken by a kid. I worry about a teacher putting a gun in their purse -- which is legal -- and puts in a locked desk drawer then goes to lunch, but a student somehow gets it. Those are what concern me ...

"It's a potential risk without a real reason as to why we should free this up," he said.

The bill now heads to Gov. Rick Snyder to veto or sign it into law.

The same day that we hear about at least 27 people killed in a school, including little children, we also get word that the Michigan legislature not only wants guns in schools, but a way for CCW holders to override any voluntary GFZ status that a school can still have.

Uhm. No. They can still put up no gun signs. They just won't be declared gun free at a state level.

I'm for this legislation. Mass shootings happen under the Gun Free Zone sign way too often.

This is the same state legislature that just voted in so-called "right-to-work" legislation. I'm sure they want to vote in every bit of extremist legislation possible before gay, Muslim, atheist, socialists take over the entire nation. One can only imagine what is next on their agenda.

KVoimakas wrote:

The same day that we hear about at least 27 people killed in a school, including little children, we also get word that the Michigan legislature not only wants guns in schools, but a way for CCW holders to override any voluntary GFZ status that a school can still have.

Uhm. No. They can still put up no gun signs. They just won't be declared gun free at a state level.

I'm for this legislation. Mass shootings happen under the Gun Free Zone sign way too often.

+1

I know that at least half of the staff at the school that my son attended before we started homeschooling are avid hunters who have freezers full of venison every year.

You missed the part about anyone with 9 hours of training and willing to shoot 94 rounds being able to qualify to carry voluntary GFZ rules regardless, plus the rural sheriffs saying they'll automatically give out CCWs rather than face personal harassment.

Michigan laws tend not to be well-thought lately...

Redbird wrote:You missed the part about anyone with 9 hours of training and willing to shoot 94 rounds being able to qualify to carry voluntary GFZ rules regardless, plus the rural sheriffs saying they'll automatically give out CCWs rather than face personal harassment.

Michigan laws tend not to be well-thought lately...

Ok, first, it's not 9 hours of training. It's an additional course on TOP of the current CPL course. Secondly, the 'additional' certification doesn't allow you to carry places where it plainly states NO GUNS. Michigan is a shall-issue state by the way. Unless there's a reason to NOT issue one, you automatically get your's if you meet the requirements.

To be honest, particularly in light of today's tragedy, I really would advocate for the school staff that is willing and able, to go through CCW and be allowed to carry on school grounds. Perhaps even make it a requirement for principles and assistant principles to carry on school grounds. Obviously with extensive ongoing training in both cases on handling this type of crisis.

shinzen wrote:To be honest, particularly in light of today's tragedy, I really would advocate for the school staff that is willing and able, to go through CCW and be allowed to carry on school grounds. Perhaps even make it a requirement for principles and assistant principles to carry on school grounds. Obviously with extensive ongoing training in both cases on handling this type of crisis.

+1

Or have some plain clothes officers as school faculty.

M4Builder wrote:

shinzen wrote:To be honest, particularly in light of today's tragedy, I really would advocate for the school staff that is willing and able, to go through CCW and be allowed to carry on school grounds. Perhaps even make it a requirement for principles and assistant principles to carry on school grounds. Obviously with extensive ongoing training in both cases on handling this type of crisis.

+1

Or have some plain clothes officers as school faculty.

Agreed.
That could work as well, or work to hire more ex-military into teaching positions- helps our vets and our schools.

M4Builder wrote:

shinzen wrote:To be honest, particularly in light of today's tragedy, I really would advocate for the school staff that is willing and able, to go through CCW and be allowed to carry on school grounds. Perhaps even make it a requirement for principles and assistant principles to carry on school grounds. Obviously with extensive ongoing training in both cases on handling this type of crisis.

+1

Or have some plain clothes officers as school faculty.

Both the LA junior high and high schools I attended had a plainclothes on duty cop assigned to them. This was '89 to '94, I don't know if this was changed. I'm also not sure if they were CCing at all times.

Here in MO a Missouri-issued CCW permit allows you to ignore the federal GSZ stuff and with permission of the faculty you can carry on the property as well as in the building. What stinks is that since my wife is not a resident, if she got an out of state CCW permit (can't get a MO, she's not a Citizen...) sh can not carry on her person off of our property as we are inside 1000' of several GSZ areas.

I can't say I'm in favor of allowing ccws in schools.

With 7.2 million teachers (in 2004) in front of classes 180 days a year, the numbers make it way to likely that accidents, thefts of guns (and possible use) or of a teacher going off the deep end (and I am a teacher... trust me teachers aren't any more sane than anyone else and teaching is high stress) will occur. I think (admittedly I don't know) the numbers of tragedies will in the end outnumber the number of preventions.

I do think armed police should be in every school, however. The officer at our school not only protects the kids against violence, but gets to know a lot of the kids in the community, and has the opportunity to intervene in their lives while they are young. Since he knows all the kids in the school, he also gets lots of tips about anything the kids know about criminal activity. Kids who wouldn't say anything otherwise go to him since they know him.

I think this type of intervention will provide more security at less risk than arming civilians at the school.

That said, of course, I'd cheer anyone who managed to save a kids life when it came down to it.

^ As a fellow teacher, I appreciate that response. Arming faculty and staff because students and parents might be armed makes schools into war zones.

And permitting concealed weapons at a college football stadium, where concealed bottles and umbrellas can get you kicked out, is just plain insane.

Redbird wrote:^ As a fellow teacher, I appreciate that response. Arming faculty and staff because students and parents might be armed makes schools into war zones.

And what are they now? And who's armed now? In every high school of 500 students or more, there's guns present, just not in the hands of the teachers.

Antiquus, why don't you address the second part of my post, too? When it comes to a point where we're promoting guns but banning umbrellas, there's a problem.

This "we need them because they've got them" argument is just like the nuclear arms race, and you saw how close that got us to world peace....

Umbrellas block other people's view. Public alcohol consumption is a nuisance.

Concealed weapons block no one's view, and alcohol consumption while carrying is illegal.

Redbird wrote:Antiquus, why don't you address the second part of my post, too? When it comes to a point where we're promoting guns but banning umbrellas, there's a problem.

There is only a problem if you believe a licensed, legal holder carrying is a danger to self and/or others, which frankly says more about you than stadium policies. I don't see it as any different from carrying a wallet, which also blocks no one's view. Bottles, of course, are about getting around stadium alcohol sales... their right to protect the stadium revenue streams.

As long as we as gun owners present ourselves as more concerned about obstructed views and annoying drunks than about potential bullets in bodies, it doesn't matter where we stand, left or right - non-gunners will see our priorities as warped.

Did anyone mention the additional training requirement for the 'super carry' license?

He vetoed it.

Redbird wrote:As long as we as gun owners present ourselves as more concerned about obstructed views and annoying drunks than about potential bullets in bodies, it doesn't matter where we stand, left or right - non-gunners will see our priorities as warped.

This is the whole point in a nutshell. And exactly the reason I think that the gun owners of America should become the champions of mental health just like the Lions Club is a champion for vision.

Consider this. For every poor guy who winds up dead on a school ground as the shooter, or not dead at the theater parking lot, there are probably 10K other diagnosable people who will not become shooters but still need help.

If we become the champions to find that one, and 9,999 others just coincidentally happen to get swept into the the treatment pool as a side effect, how does that hurt society? Anyone?

I'm ready to hear an objection? Reason always wins with me.

MB

It's going to have to be a both/and -- mental health and a willingness to admit that military rifles belong in the military -- rather than an either/or of "we'll champion the root cause of trigger pulling (the person) but not the root cause of the casualties (the trigger) -- before gunners are seen as good guys.

It'll be interesting to see what "meaningful contribution" the NRA makes at its Friday press conference this week.

All moot. Governor vetoed it.

Not moot - the discussion has just turned to different aspects of the issue.

In his veto remarks, the governor basically spelled out what he wants to see in the revised draft - an opt-out clause for everyone. When he gets that, he'll sign.

Antiquus wrote:...alcohol consumption while carrying is illegal.

Only in some places.